If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You said several ...I don't see one. Did you read the article you linked to? It was debunked by a whole barrel of scientists..
And that was a blog ... A blog.
Under "works cited" where would you put that?

Originally Posted by Julie R.

Now bear in mind this is an article written in Slate which is hardly a bastion of conservative thinking.

oh ok

Originally Posted by Julie R.

Finally, I do see the point Hoosier was trying to make, which is that no one race has a monopoly on poverty and disadvantage. Maybe, instead of dismissing as racist such studies, we should explore more and find out why traditional teaching methods are such abject failures on a subset of society.

Maybe big college teacher Remington can chime in with some words of wisdom....

The reason I brought up The Bell Curve is this. I was talking to a friend who is a psychology professor at a local collage. We were talking about race relations and he told me that it's such a hot issue you can't even discuss the numbers. He has taught straight out of the text, and been accused of racism. The Bell Curve book was written using data from research by Arthur Jensen. The gap in scores narrows some in similar economic conditions but doesn't go away. To ignore the problem and call anyone who wants to address it ignorant or racist does nothing to solve it. Reactions like that only make the problems worse. I'm not saying I'm genetically superior to anyone. What I am saying is if you can't even discuss it the problem will remain along with the gap in income and social class. We've been trained to immediately jump on anyone with a view other then what's PC.

The reason I brought up The Bell Curve is this. I was talking to a friend who is a psychology professor at a local collage. We were talking about race relations and he told me that it's such a hot issue you can't even discuss the numbers. He has taught straight out of the text, and been accused of racism. The Bell Curve book was written using data from research by Arthur Jensen. The gap in scores narrows some in similar economic conditions but doesn't go away. To ignore the problem and call anyone who wants to address it ignorant or racist does nothing to solve it. Reactions like that only make the problems worse. I'm not saying I'm genetically superior to anyone. What I am saying is if you can't even discuss it the problem will remain along with the gap in income and social class. We've been trained to immediately jump on anyone with a view other then what's PC.

And your right this probably was off subject.

Hugs and Kisses
Tremayne

The reality is that this debate has been around for a long time. One is stuck with a few facts. First, no one has ever figured out good ways to differentiate between the effects of biology (nature) and the effects of environment (nurture). Second, the variations within groupings are much greater than the variations between groupings. Third, differences in IQ test performance are of limited value in explaining differences in ultimate economic performance.

The thing best predicted by IQ testing is performance on similar tests, not performance in life or the economy. On balance, I think the question is off topic. More importantly, it is irrelevant for almost any discussion that is not purely academic. I see little to suggest that white males, who are clearly stupider than white females and Asians of any sex (based on IQ tests), have suffered from their lack of brain power.

If the Christian coalition put up signs saying "Why believe in Allah" we wouldn't hear the end of it. It would be beaten to death in the media, and by our liberal friends as radical Christian fundamentalist stepping on poor minorities. We should be more accepting,blah, blah, blah. It's this double standard that's gotten old. I think you have to be evil to put something like that up.

If the Christian coalition put up signs saying "Why believe in Allah" we wouldn't hear the end of it. It would be beaten to death in the media, and by our liberal friends as radical Christian fundamentalist stepping on poor minorities. We should be more accepting,blah, blah, blah. It's this double standard that's gotten old. I think you have to be evil to put something like that up.

With all respect, I see more commercials for Jesus than I do for toothpaste and breakfast cereals combined. Half (a slight exaggeration) of those tell me I will damned for eternity if I don't accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior. The advertisement cited at the beginning of this thread is certainly less hostile and infinitely less likely to be seen than what I see daily. In fact, it's ironic that I never would have heard of this ad without this forum and I suspect that the poster wouldn't have seen it without republication by someone else.

The reality is that this debate has been around for a long time. One is stuck with a few facts. First, no one has ever figured out good ways to differentiate between the effects of biology (nature) and the effects of environment (nurture). Second, the variations within groupings are much greater than the variations between groupings. Third, differences in IQ test performance are of limited value in explaining differences in ultimate economic performance.

The thing best predicted by IQ testing is performance on similar tests, not performance in life or the economy. On balance, I think the question is off topic. More importantly, it is irrelevant for almost any discussion that is not purely academic. I see little to suggest that white males, who are clearly stupider than white females and Asians of any sex (based on IQ tests), have suffered from their lack of brain power.

I read this & I read it again & couldn't believe you would say this. The does not validate nor excuse your last statement, nor the statements preceding.

In my working career in private industry I worked with 2 separate demographic groups: Underground Miners & a demographic that consisted of some of the better Engineering Graduates of accredited universities. There is a major difference in case you missed it. Smarter people make smarter choices, it is only in government where the standards are low that someome can get by faking it.

What I have found is all groups are wired differently. You might read the study on autism published a few months ago in Scientific American. It's very interesting.

With all respect, I see more commercials for Jesus than I do for toothpaste and breakfast cereals combined. Half (a slight exaggeration) of those tell me I will damned for eternity if I don't accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior. The advertisement cited at the beginning of this thread is certainly less hostile and infinitely less likely to be seen than what I see daily. In fact, it's ironic that I never would have heard of this ad without this forum and I suspect that the poster wouldn't have seen it without republication by someone else.

I doubt those adds throw an insult at another religion before they try to recruit you.

I doubt those adds throw an insult at another religion before they try to recruit you.

I'm missing the insult. The ad says "Why believe in a god? Be good for goodness' sake." How is that more hostile than "The end is near. Accept Jesus as your savior or be damned. Eternity lasts forever."

I read this & I read it again & couldn't believe you would say this. The does not validate nor excuse your last statement, nor the statements preceding.

In my working career in private industry I worked with 2 separate demographic groups: Underground Miners & a demographic that consisted of some of the better Engineering Graduates of accredited universities. There is a major difference in case you missed it. Smarter people make smarter choices, it is only in government where the standards are low that someome can get by faking it.

What I have found is all groups are wired differently. You might read the study on autism published a few months ago in Scientific American. It's very interesting.

Marvin,

I'm not sure what parts of my statement you are questioning or the basis of your questions. Wikepedia notes that:

"The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns[15] states that IQ scores account for about one-fourth of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes."

By virtue of the luck of my birth, my schooling, and my employment, I have spent most of my life in environments where IQ's that were less than 3 standard deviations above average were considered to be a little slow. However, the smartest and most successful boss I ever worked for barely made it through a 4th rate college and worked hard to do it. What he had was drive and great judgment and that trumped raw intelligence every day.

At 14 he worked part time emptying bed pans. At age 21, with his IQ of about 115, he was CEO and part owner of a NYSE $400 million temporary staffing company at a time when that qualified as Fortune 500. He sold that and bought a bankrupt environmental assessment laboratory that he turned into one of the top ten engineering consulting companies in the world before selling it to retire at the age of 40. He surrounded himself with smart people and I was happy to be one of them. Most of us understood completely why he was boss. Two of the smartest arranged the buyout that made my boss very wealthy. The two geniuses who engineered the takeover drove the company into bankruptcy within a year.

Brains take many forms. IQ is just one of them and not necessarily the most important.